Oklahoma House democrats introduce SAVE Act to curb gun violence

[DavidMcmillan]

I tend to agree with you.

 

[dennishoddy]

I've glossed over the new bipartisan (rino) framework (political legal speak meant to mislead the reader) that the committee came up with.
Some of which says to improve school security and spend more on mental health issues.
The AR ban biden wanted was not in it.
If it doesn't get watered down with riders and the final writing of the bill is the same as the framework, I could agree with a small part of it.
It's the same things those of us that are shall not be infringed minded have discussed in this thread. Don't blame the firearm but get back to mental health issues and school security.
Being politics, I'm sure the Framework that they have presented will eventually be against everything we believe in, but I'll quote their exact words.

Our plan increases needed mental health resources, improves school security and support for students, and helps ensure dangerous criminals and those who are adjudicated as mentally ill can't purchases weapons. Most importantly our plan saves lives while also protecting the constitutional rights of law-abiding Americans. We look forward to earning broad, bipartisan support and passing our commonsense proposal into law the Senators said in a group statement"

For me, the words commonsense present a big red flag. That's the buzz word the politicians use when it should say gun control. The language in the "framework" only enhances what most of us agree on that your already prevented from purchasing a firearm if your judged to be mentally defective. What's new about that?
It doesn't address national red flag laws that some wanted. It does address enhanced security background checks on gun purchasers between the ages of 18-21 perhaps like @ GTG proposed but doesn't prevent them from purchases and there is no waiting period proposed longer than what we have currently if I read it right.
Again, when it comes down to a final bill, it could be 180 degrees in the opposite direction.

 

[Chuckie]

I really don’t think we are losing the game. We’ve taken so much ground over the past 30 years, in both the courts and the legislatures. We haven’t had a significant piece of anti-2nd Amendment legislation passed on the federal level since the now sunset 94 AWB. We’ve had some crappy EO’s out of the WH from both parties, but nothing with real teeth.

So it’s plainly obvious that the correct course is the one we’re on. They give nothing so we take what we can and give nothing back. This time is no different.

On the Federal level you are correct, but on the State level pro-2nd-Amendment advocates are losing more and more all the time. We may be winning the battle, but we're slowly losing the war. I don't know what the answer should be, but I do know that every time a 'mass' shooting occurs the anti-gun sentiment grows just a little more.
It matters not whether those that commit theses shootings are legal gun owners or have stolen the weapons they use, because every shooting puts the spotlight and blame on ALL gun owners. I don't want to sound like I'm 'throwing in the towel' but I believe that eventually many of the firearms we enjoy having will be banned, with our best hope being 'grandfather clause(s)' included within the law(s).
I think that the best we can do is to continue to ensure that, at least within our own State of Oklahoma, strong pro-gun laws and 2nd-Amendment support is prioritized.

 

[Buzzdraw]

I would be happy if the national "control" bill never makes it to the floor of the Senate. Too many things can happen in the dark of the night, especially where there are RINOS involved.